Diana Stricker Photo
Engineer John Schmitz with sketch.
Two retail buildings are being proposed for a vacant 14-acre lot at 250 N. Main St. Since the project would impact wetlands, a two-hour public hearing was held Thursday before the Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC), and will continue Oct. 12.
The site is located between Route 1 and I‑95, and is adjacent to the W. S. Clancy Memorial Funeral Home on one side; and United Tire Inc. and Greystone Manor condominiums on the other side.
Diana Stricker Photo
Site sketch (buildings in brown).
“The site plan proposal is to construct two buildings on the site with associated parking,” said John Schmitz, an engineer with BL Companies of Meriden. He did not identify the retail uses, and later told the Eagle he would not name the prospective retailers at this point.
Efforts have been ongoing for several years to develop the property, which contains wetlands and rocky outcroppings. Jeff Shapiro and family, who operate the Cedar Island Marina in Clinton, have owned the property since 1997. Shapiro received approval two years ago for Phase 1 of the project, which created an access road and central driveway. Phase 2 is currently before the IWC.
Plans filed with the IWC show that one building would be 62,426 square feet and have 262 parking spaces. The smaller building would be 13,200 square feet and have 53 parking spaces.
By comparison, the Costco warehouse that was once proposed for the Exit 56 complex was a 158,000 square-foot building, plus 16 gas pumps. About 14 years ago, Costco was interested in the North Main Street site but walked away because it would have required too many zoning variances.
Wetlands Impact
Schmitz said Phase 2 would include filling in the central wetland, which would be more than 5,200 square feet. He said the state DOT may request that Route 1 be widened at the entrance to the property and a traffic light be installed.
“Almost any widening would impact the wetlands to some extent,” Schmitz said. He estimated the wetland impact near the road at more than 4,000 square feet.
A third area of wetland disturbance would be about 150 square feet, which would be needed to extend the sewer line into the site.
Diana Stricker Photo
Rachael Hyland & John Schmitz
Rachael Hyland, a wetland professional with BL Companies, said the central wetland “is not the greatest quality.” It would be paved for a parking lot.
She said all wetlands will be mitigated at more than the 2 to 1 ratio that is required by the IWC. That means that the developers must restore affected wetlands or create new ones in another location. She said since the central wetland is forested, they will create forested wetlands in the replacement area.
She said the wetlands near Route 1 are covered with invasive plants that need to be removed.
In Phase 1 of the project, the initial plans called for filling in about 13,000 square feet of wetlands, but the development team revised the plans and reduced that amount to 1,442 square feet.
Hyland said the wetlands that were created as mitigation for Phase 1 “seem pretty successful so far.”
The IWC regulations require the consideration of “prudent and feasible alternatives,” which were discussed by Schmitz. He said an alternate layout to the large parking lot may be a feasible way to have less impact on the central wetland, but it would not be prudent. He said it would be better to impact the central wetland and create a 10,000 square-foot replacement wetlands, rather than several smaller ones.
Diana Stricker Photo
The commissioners spent considerable time asking questions of the development team.
Peer Reviews
Independent consulting firms were previously selected by the IWC to review the plans, with the costs paid by the applicants. The peer review consultants gave brief overviews of their reports Thursday, and offered suggestions and comments.
Robert Wheway, an engineer with Codespoti & Associates of Orange, discussed the stormwater management plan, and the volume and speed of stormwater runoff. He also mentioned that blasting will be necessary for construction of the larger building and parking lot.
Diana Stricker Photo
Matthew Popp peer review consultant; development team at right.
Matthew J. Popp, a wetland specialist from Environmental Land Solutions LLC of Norwalk, reviewed wetland mitigation plans and erosion control plans. He also discussed the proposed landscaping and said the plans seem “sparse” and suggested planting more shade trees.
Schmitz said he has been reviewing the peer review reports. “We don’t have any real issues with the comments and questions,” he said. He also said that some of the plans will be updated and revised in response to the peer reviewers and the commissioners.
Two Public Comments
A resident of the adjacent condominiums asked about the blasting plan. Schmitz gave a brief overview of blasting and said those issues will be addressed by the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission. The site plans must be submitted to P&Z if the IWC grants a permit.
Diana Stricker Photo
Dave Cioffi, a local resident, who frequently attends IWC meetings, asked why the wetland mitigation was set at a 2 to 1 ratio. “Why not 3 to 1,” he suggested. “Reconstructed wetlands are never as good as the original,” he said.
The hearing will resume Oct 12 at 7:30 p.m. at the Canoe Brook Senior Center.
###
Glad to see that Branford appears able still to attract new retailers.
Does Eagle -- or other readers --know how much was spent for these peer reviews? Or if such hired, outside technical assistance was usual before the recent rounds of personnel changes to the IWC?